1. Heard Mr. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent/contemner.

2. The factual matrix of the case are that the learned Sub-Judge, Budgam in an application arising out of Civil Original Suit pending decision before him came to issue ad-interim injunction against the respondent/defendants which included the present respondent namely Syed. Nissar Gilani, the then Tehsildar, Budgam. This order of ad-interim injunction appears to have been endorsed in the name of process server namely Mohammad Ishaq Bhat 14.9.1994, who reported that the respondent Syed Nissar Gilani refused to receive the copy of the said court order and passed derogatory remarks about the said court by expressing to the process server that the court of Sub-Judge cannot send such orders to him nor has it jurisdiction to pass any order against a Tehsildar. On receipt of this report of the process server the learned Sub-Judge, Budgam came to issue show cause notice to the respondent namely Syed.Nissar Gilani to the effect as to why a case of contempt against him be not submitted to the Honble High Court

under Section 94 of the Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir with a further notice as to why complaint for offence punisha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document